Meigs now enjoyed by all!

wrote in message
oups.com...


Dave Stadt wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...


Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article .com,
wrote:

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
In article
.com,
wrote:


Again, what's YOUR evidence that the CPD has a park
surplus?


Look at a map. Most of the lakeshore is occupied by parks.

Most? Portions occupy the space between LSD and the lake, and
portions
are private residencies and industrial. What's your standard
for
adequate public parks, for 3 million people?

JG

OK, buster, let's turn the tables: what do you think should be
the
standard for adequate GA airports for a city of 3 million
people?

I frankly haven't seen a movement by a large portion of the
citizens
for more capacity. MDW's size is 1 square mile and seems to due
just
fine.
ORD takes GA, but ya gotta pay the fees. Land is expensive, so
there's
a limit for any new fields within city limits. Outside, Lansing,
Gary,
DPA, Shaumburg, Palwaukee, and Waukegan serve the region fine.


I guess that those places would be good places for parks, no?

In general, post WW-2 suburbs included ample park space, but IMHO
Waukegan's
lakefront location could be attractive for residential development.

Lakefront
property is expensive, so all those parks must be worth a bundle to
developers, no?

As is central park in NYC, but try selling off and see what happens!

The Mission of the Chi. PD is:
"Come Out & Play!
Discover the pleasures of Chicago Park District treasures! The Chicago
Park District manages over 220 stunning facilities throughout the city
- most can play host to your next event.
For more information about the Chicago Park District's more than 7300
acres of parkland, 552 parks, 33 beaches, nine museums, two
world-class
conservatories, 16 historic lagoons, 10 bird and wildlife gardens,
thousands of special events, sports and entertaining programs, please
continue on through the event section."

Many CPD parks aren't fit for humans. They are rundown, crime ridden,
god
forsaken places which would better serve the community if Walmart were
to
build on the property. Several downtown areas are nice but other than
that
"dump" is a better description than park.

Many urban cities have similiar problems, and non-city dwellers should
feel
grateful that cities house some unwanted residents. Walmart would
want the land for free, plus additional subsidies.

Give it to them. Think of the boon to the economy. New jobs, sales and
property tax revenue, etc. The city would be foolish not to give the
rundown drug and crime infested parks to Walmart.


JG